Re: [apps-discuss] Links and graphs

[Graham Klyne <[e-mail]>]

For information, I've replied to this copying [e-mail] but not 
[e-mail], as I think the discussion is headed into territory more 
germane to web application than general IETF application issues.  Interested 
folks can pick up the discussion at 
http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-ldp-wg/

#g
--

On 15/11/2012 17:36, Erik Wilde wrote:
> hello graham.
>
> On 2012-11-15 5:02 , Graham Klyne wrote:
>> I don't follow what you're saying here.  I don't disagree (as someone
>> involved with RDF) that RDF has made its life hard in several ways, but
>> if what you have and want to pass around is a graph, how does one *not*
>> push it down into the data?
>
> the big problem with RDF on the level we're discussing here is that RDF pushes
> everything into vocabularies, and thus renders media types almost meaningless
> (apart from distinguishing RDF serializations). that's a problem for home
> documents or similar web-oriented approaches that rely on the media type being a
> crucial signal for understanding the interaction semantics of resources.
>
>> (Personally, I'd like to see json-home be something that has a clear
>> mapping to RDF, but that's a different discussion.)
>
> fwiw, https://github.com/dret/I-D-1/tree/master/json-home is where i have
> started creating a mapping to XML, and i'd be more than happy to collaborate
> with others to do the same for an RDF schema. but like i said above, the whole
> concept of home documents hinges around the assumption that a media type signals
> interaction semantics, so that clients can decide what resources to engage with.
> in RDF, this is not how the world works (yet, i still hope that we'll see this
> tackled at some point in time), so maybe there's a little less utility in the
> whole approach. regardless of that, we have discovered in our current work in
> the "Linked Data Platform" W3C WG that we probably need some concept of a
> "service document" or a "home document", and thus it might be interesting to
> look at how the current json-home approach could be mapped to RDF and would give
> us some useful foundation.
>
> cheers,
>
> dret.
>